Code correctness, and testing strategies

[Ben Finney]

Duncan Booth <duncan.booth at invalid.invalid> writes:

> You still need human testing and QA, the difference is that with a
> good set of unit tests you reduce the number of times code comes
> back from QA before it can be passed and make it more likely that
> the customer will be happy with the first version.

Paradoxically, you also end up writing less code that you would
otherwise.

Behaviour Driven Development insists that you be lazy in satisfying
the tests and implement only the simplest thing that could possibly
work (and refactor code whenever the unit test suite passes). This
results in never writing code into the application that isn't needed
to satisfy some unit test, saving a lot of fruitless coding time.

-- 
 \      "...one of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was |
  `\        that, lacking zero, they had no way to indicate successful |
_o__)               termination of their C programs."  -- Robert Firth |
Ben Finney